Heraldic Beasts?

[thescot]

Dang, I don't think I'd use that Tasmanian Tiger for allegator bait, much less on arms. That's a pretty homely rascal.

[MacLowlife]

I can't be sure of the scale, but that looks like what we call a Racossum around here.

[Bugbear]

I can't be sure of the scale, but that looks like what we call a Racossum around here.

At least it's not a jackalope or a chupacabra.

[Mike_Oettle]

Come on, guys! The Tas is a unique critter. One of the very few marsupial predators. I believe it survived in Tasmania because the dingo couldn't swim across the straits. Then along came white men with guns!

[Downunder Kilt]

Come on, guys! The Tas is a unique critter. One of the very few marsupial predators. I believe it survived in Tasmania because the dingo couldn't swim across the straits. Then along came white men with guns!

You are quite right Mike, the tiger had no natural predators and it took men with guns to make it extinct. At one stage there was a 1 pound bounty on its head, which in those days was a fortune.

[Bugbear]

This book was suggested in Cecil Wade's book.

Full text of "Heraldry of fish. Notices of the principal families bearing fish in their arms"
by Thomas Moule (IA from Google search).

I was looking for lobster heraldry... Thought MacLowlife might want a lobster on his crest...

[MacLowlife]

I think the difficulty of the lobster as a crest is the likelihood of confusion with the mudbug...Many long years ago, a friend knitted a lovely sweater for me, featuring lobsters in the place of the familiar reindeer. I went looking for its progeny online and found this instead:


http://blog.craftzine.com/archive/20...bster_swe.html

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

To be valid, a grant of arms must be substantive. Generally speaking substantive grants are made by sovereign entities through the appropriate governmental department. Arms granted by the Lord Lyon and the Chief Herald of Ireland are substantive, as each of these offices are, ultimately, a branch of government.

The exception to grants made by governments are those substantive grants made by private bodies which operate by and with the approval of the government. The College of Arms in England and the now vacant office of Cronista Rey de Armas in Spain are perhaps the best known private bodies engaged in the devisal, granting, and recording of arms.

In both instances the College of Arms and the Office of Cronista Rey de Armas grant without the objection of the head of state. In England the College of Arms is a private body regulated by the Duke of Norfolk. In Spain the modern office of Cronista was created during the period of the Franco government and was, as I understand it, regarded as a department within the Spanish Ministry of Justice.

Every substantive heraldic office records the arms that they grant, although it must be borne in mind that they all follow slightly different procedures in the granting process. This variation of process, allied to the differing social customs between nations, has led some less-than-knowledgeable individuals to suggest that only British or Irish grants were truly substantive. Nothing could be farther from the truth. No heraldic authority has a monopoly of jurisdiction beyond its national borders, although each has the ability to grant arms on a case by case basis "over seas".

As all of North America and South America (with the exception of Brazil) at one time belonged to Spain, the Cronista has quite reasonably included these territories in his "imperial" mandate.

As the current Spanish College of Arms lacks a substantive position vis-a-vis the Spanish government or crown, it functions more along the lines of a graphic design studio which then records their work-for-hire on behalf of their clients.

[Bugbear]

Yes, that is an interesting interview. And the last link to the US Army Quartermaster Foundation has lots of interesting information, too.

I also had to go back and look through the American Heraldry Society information for a few things.

[Bugbear]

All Right, I have read over several things, though I'm sure nowhere enough, and have concluded that I am not in any way entitled to substantive arms. There is a four-hundred or more year old Precedent, as far as I can tell from the American Heraldry Society information, of non-substantive arms being assumed and used by individuals and organizations etc. in what is now the U.S. That information is covered in all the links Cajunscot has provided. And we all know about Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. constitution, not that I would be qualified to interpret it.

I think I have to retract my gripe in the original post against the youth group using pseudo-arms. As Cajunscot said heraldry is used in the U.S.

So... Would I design and asume arms? Probably not.

At least I'm a bit more aware of heraldry now.